Strategy to identify the causes and to solve a sludge granulation problem in methanogenic reactors: application to a full-scale plant treating cheese wastewater

  • Hervé Macarie
  • Maricela Esquivel
  • Acela Laguna
  • Olivier Baron
  • Rachid El Mamouni
  • Serge R. Guiot
  • Oscar Monroy
Advances in Environmental Biotechnology and Engineering 2016

Abstract

Granulation of biomass is at the basis of the operation of the most successful anaerobic systems (UASB, EGSB and IC reactors) applied worldwide for wastewater treatment. Despite of decades of studies of the biomass granulation process, it is still not fully understood and controlled. “Degranulation/lack of granulation” is a problem that occurs sometimes in anaerobic systems resulting often in heavy loss of biomass and poor treatment efficiencies or even complete reactor failure. Such a problem occurred in Mexico in two full-scale UASB reactors treating cheese wastewater. A close follow-up of the plant was performed to try to identify the factors responsible for the phenomenon. Basically, the list of possible causes to a granulation problem that were investigated can be classified amongst nutritional, i.e. related to wastewater composition (e.g. deficiency or excess of macronutrients or micronutrients, too high COD proportion due to proteins or volatile fatty acids, high ammonium, sulphate or fat concentrations), operational (excessive loading rate, sub- or over-optimal water upflow velocity) and structural (poor hydraulic design of the plant). Despite of an intensive search, the causes of the granulation problems could not be identified. The present case remains however an example of the strategy that must be followed to identify these causes and could be used as a guide for plant operators or consultants who are confronted with a similar situation independently of the type of wastewater. According to a large literature based on successful experiments at lab scale, an attempt to artificially granulate the industrial reactor biomass through the dosage of a cationic polymer was also tested but equally failed. Instead of promoting granulation, the dosage caused a heavy sludge flotation. This shows that the scaling of such a procedure from lab to real scale cannot be advised right away unless its operability at such a scale can be demonstrated.

Keywords

Anaerobic Cationic polymers Cheese wastewater Granulation UASB reactor Water upflow velocity Trace metals 

Abbreviations

COD

Chemical oxygen demand

D1

Digester 1

D2

Digester 2

DAF

Dissolved air flotation

EAg/AgCl

Redox potential according to Ag/AgCl reference electrode

EGSB

Expanded granular sludge bed

FOG

Fats, oil and grease

FOGCOD

FOG expressed as COD equivalent

FOGSLR

FOG sludge loading rate

GLSS

Gas-liquid-solid separator

HRT

Hydraulic retention time

HT

Homogenisation (buffer) tank

IC

Internal circulation

LCFA

Long-chain fatty acids

OLRs

Sludge organic loading rate

OLRv

Volumetric organic loading rate

PW

Pumping well

SRT

Solid retention time

SVI

Sludge volumetric index

TSS

Total suspended solids

VFA

Volatile fatty acids

VSS

Volatile suspended solids

Vup

Water upflow (superficial) velocity

UASB

Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket

References

  1. Abbasi T, Abbasi SA (2012) Formation and impact of granules in fostering clean energy production and wastewater treatment in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 16:1696–1708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahn Y-H, Min K-S, Speece RE (2001) Full scale UASB reactor performances in the brewery industry. Environ Technol 22:463–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alphenaar PA, Sleyster R, De Reuver P, Ligthart GJ, Lettinga G (1993) Phosphorus requirement in high rate anaerobic wastewater treatment. Water Res 27:749–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amaral AL, Pereira MA, Da Motta M, Pons MN, Mota M, Ferreira EC, Alves MM (2004) Development of image analysis techniques as a tool to detect and quantify morphological changes in anaerobic sludge: II. Application to a granule deterioration process triggered by contact with oleic acid. Biotechnol Bioeng 87:194–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arcand Y, Guiot SR, Desrochers M, Chavarie C (1994) Impact of the reactor hydrodynamics and organic loading on the size and activity of anaerobic granules. Chem Eng J 56:B23–B35Google Scholar
  6. Ariyavongvivat E, Suraraksa B, Chaiprasert P (2015) Physicochemical and biological characteristics of enhanced anaerobic microbial granulation by synthetic and natural cationic polymers. Energy Procedia 79:851–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhunia P, Ghangrekar MM (2008) Influence of biogas-induced mixing on granulation in UASB reactors. Biochem Eng J 41:136–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borzacconi L, López I, Passeggi M, Etchebehere C, Barcia R (2008) Sludge deterioration in a full scale UASB reactor after a pH drop working under low loading conditions. Wat Sci Tech 57:797–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cail RG, Barford JP (1985) The development of granulation in an upflow floc digester and an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket digester treating cane juice stillage. Biotechnol Lett 7:493–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Callander IJ, Barford JP (1983) Precipitation, chelation, and the availability of metals as nutrients in anaerobic digestion. I. Methodology, II. Applications. Biotechnol Bioeng 25:1947–1972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Celis-Garcia LB, Razo-Flores E, Monroy O (2007) Performance of a down-flow fluidized-bed reactor under sulfate reduction conditions using volatile fatty acids as electron donors. Biotechnol Bioeng 97:771–779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chipasa KB, Medrzycka K (2006) Behaviour of lipids in biological wastewater treatment processes. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 33:635–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark JN (1988) Anaerobic digestion of whey in a pilot-scale upflow anaerobic sludge blanket digester. In: Tilche A, Rozzi A (eds) Poster-papers of the 5th international symposium on anaerobic digestion. Monduzzi Editore, Bologna, pp 489–493Google Scholar
  14. Costa JC, Abreu AA, Ferreira EC, Alves MM (2007) Quantitative image analysis as a diagnostic tool for monitoring structural changes of anaerobic granular sludge during detergent shock loads. Biotechnol Bioeng 98:60–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Costa JC, Mesquita DP, Amaral AL, Alves MM, Ferreira EC (2013) Quantitative image analysis for the characterization of microbial aggregates in biological wastewater treatment: a review. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:5887–5912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Danalewich JR, Papagiannis TG, Belyea RL, Tumbleson ME, Raskin L (1998) Characterization of dairy waste streams, current treatment practices, and potential for biological nutrient removal. Water Res 32:3555–3568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dean JA (1992) Lange’s handbook of chemistry. 14 ed. McGraw Hill, New York, USA 8.6–8.11Google Scholar
  18. El Mamouni R, Guiot SR, Mercier R, Safi B, Samson R (1995) Liming impact on granules activity of the multiplate anaerobic reactor (MPAR) treating whey permeate. Bioprocess Eng 12:47–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. El Mamouni R, Leduc R, Guiot SR (1998) Influence of synthetic and natural polymers on the anaerobic granulation process. Wat Sci Tech 38(8–9):341–347Google Scholar
  20. Frankin RJ, de Pijper MAM (2007) Process for producing granular biomass. WO patent 2007/089144 A1, 10 pagesGoogle Scholar
  21. Grootaerd H, Defour D, Demeulemaere J, Simoens F (1999) Full-scale experience with anaerobic treatment of dairy wastewater at Belgomilk-Langemark. Med Fac Landouww Univ. Gent 64(5a):53–58Google Scholar
  22. Grotenhuis JTC, van Lier JB, Plugge CM, Stams AJM, Zehnder AJB (1991) Effect of ethylene glycol-bis(β-aminoethyl ether)-N,N-tetraacetic acid (EGTA) on stability and activity of methanogenic granular sludge. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 36:109–114Google Scholar
  23. Guiot SR, Gorur SS, Kennedy KJ (1988) Nutritional and environmental factors contributing to microbial aggregation during upflow anaerobic sludge bed-filter (UBF) reactor start-up. In: Hall ER, Hobson PN (eds) Anaerobic digestion 1988, proceedings 5th international symposium. Pergamon Press, London, pp 47–53Google Scholar
  24. Guyot JP, Macarie H, Noyola A (1990) Anaerobic digestion of a petrochemical wastewater using the UASB process. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 24/25:579–589Google Scholar
  25. Hernandez-Eugenio G, Fardeau ML, Patel BKC, Macarie H, Garcia JL, Ollivier B (2000) Desulfovibrio mexicanus sp. nov., a sulfate-reducing bacterium isolated from an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor treating cheese wastewaters. Anaerobe 6:305–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hwu CS (1997) Enhancing anaerobic treatment of wastewaters containing oleic acid. PhD thesis, University of Wageningen, The Netherlands, ISBN 90–5485–733-1Google Scholar
  27. Hwu CS, Tseng SK, Yuan CY, Kulik Z, Lettinga G (1998) Biosorption of long-chain fatty acids in UASB treatment process. Water Res 32:1571–1579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jeison D, Del Rio A, van Lier JB (2008) Impact of high saline wastewaters on anaerobic granular sludge functionalities. Wat Sci Tech 57(6):815–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jeong HS, Kim YH, Yeom SH, Song BK, Lee DI (2005) Facilitated UASB granule formation using organic-inorganic hybrid polymers. Process Biochem 40:89–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kim YH, Yeom SH, Ryu JY, Song BK (2004) Development of a novel UASB/CO2-stripper system for the removal of calcium ion in paper wastewater. Process Biochem 39:1393–1399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kobayashi T, Xu KQ, Chiku H (2015) Release of extracellular polymeric substance and disintegration of anaerobic granular sludge under reduced sulfur compounds-rich conditions. Energies 8:7968–7985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kugelman IJ, Chin KK (1971) Toxicity, synergism and antagonism in anaerobic waste treatment processes. Adv Chem Ser 105:55–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Laguna A, Ouattara A, Gonzalez RO, Baron O, Famá G, El Mamouni R, Guiot S, Monroy O, Macarie H (1999) A simple and low cost technique for determining the granulometry of upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor sludge. Wat Sci Tech 40(8):1–8Google Scholar
  34. Lettinga G, Hulshoff Pol LW (1991) UASB-process design for various types of wastewaters. Wat Sci Tech 24(8):87–107Google Scholar
  35. Li J, Hu B, Zheng P, Qaisar M, Mei L (2008) Filamentous granular sludge bulking in a laboratory scale UASB reactor. Bioresour Technol 99:3431–3438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maat DZ, Gorur SS (1990) Start-up and performance testing of a full scale UASB anaerobic wastewater treatment facility. In: Proceedings 44th industrial waste conference. Purdue University, Lewis Publishers Inc, Chelsea, pp 209–214Google Scholar
  37. Macarie H, Guyot JP (1995) Use of ferrous sulphate to reduce the redox potential and allow the start-up of UASB reactors treating slowing biodegradable compounds: application to a wastewater containing 4-methylbenzoic acid. Environ Technol 16:1185–1192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mañas A, Spérandio M, Decker F, Biscans B (2012) Location and chemical composition of microbially induced phosphorus precipitates in anaerobic and aerobic granular sludge. Environ Technol 33:2195–2209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McHugh S, O'Reilly C, Mahony T, Colleran E, O'Flaherty V (2003) Anaerobic granular sludge bioreactor technology. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 2:225–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McHugh S, Collins G, O’Flaherty V (2006) Long-term, high rate anaerobic biological treatment of whey wastewaters at psychrophilic temperatures. Bioresour Technol 97:1669–1678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Monroy O, Vázquez F, Derramadero JC, Guyot JP (1995) Anaerobic-aerobic treatment of cheese wastewater with national technology in Mexico: the case of “El Sauz”. Wat Sci Tech 32(12):149–156Google Scholar
  42. O’Flaherty V, Lens PNL, De Beer D, Colleran E (1997) Effect of feed composition and upflow velocity on aggregate characteristics in anaerobic upflow reactors. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 47:102–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pereboom JHF (1997) Strength characterisation of microbial granules. Wat Sci Tech 36(6–7):141–148Google Scholar
  44. Rinzema A, Lettinga G (1988) Anaerobic treatment of sulfate containing wastewater. In: Wise DL (ed) Biotreatment systems, CRC press, vol III. Boca Raton, Florida, pp 65–109Google Scholar
  45. Rinzema A, van Lier J, Lettinga G (1988) Sodium inhibition of acetoclastic methanogens in granular sludge from a UASB reactor. Enz Microb Technol 10:24–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sekiguchi Y, Ohashi A, Parks DH, Yamauchi T, Tyson GW, Hugenholtz P (2015) First genomic insights into members of a candidate bacterial phylum responsible for wastewater bulking. Peer J 3:e740. doi:10.7717/perrj.740 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Speece RE (2008) Anaerobic biotechnology and odor/corrosion control for municipalities and industries. Chapter 16, trace metals. Archae press, Nashville, Tennessee, USA, pp 405-430Google Scholar
  48. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (1995) 19th edn. American Public Health Association/American Water Works Association/Water Environment Federation, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  49. Thaveersi J, Gernaey K, Kaonga B, Boucneau G, Verstraete W (1994) Organic and ammonium nitrogen and oxygen in relation to granular sludge growth in lab-scale UASB reactors. Wat Sci Tech 30(12):43–53Google Scholar
  50. Thaveersi J, Daffonchio D, Liessens B, Vandermeren P, Verstraete W (1995) Granulation and sludge bed stability in upflow anaerobic sludge bed reactors in relation to surface thermodynamics. Appl Environ Microbiol 61:3681–3686Google Scholar
  51. van Lier JB, van der Zee FP, Frijters CTMJ, Ersahin ME (2015) Celebrating 40 years anaerobic sludge bed reactors for industrial wastewater treatment. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 14:681–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vanderhaegen B, Ysebaert E, Favere K, van Wambeke M, Peeters T, Pánic V, Vandenlangerbergh V, Verstraete W (1992) Acidogenesis in relation to in-reactor granule yield. Wat Sci Tech 25(7):21–30Google Scholar
  53. Visser A, Alphenaar PA, Gao Y, van Rossum G, Lettinga G (1993) Granulation and immobilisation of methanogenic and sulfate-reducing bacteria in high-rate anaerobic reactors. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 40:575–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wang JS, Hu YY, Wu CD (2005) Comparing the effect of bioflocculant with synthetic polymers on enhancing granulation in UASB reactors for low-strength wastewater treatment. Water SA 31:177–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yu HQ, Fang HHP (2001) Acidification of mid- and high-strength dairy wastewaters. Water Res 35:3697–3705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zandvoort MH, van Hullenbusch ED, Gieteling J, Lens PNL (2006) Granular sludge in full-scale anaerobic bioreactors: trace element content and deficiencies. Enz Microb Technol 39:337–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zitomer DH, Burns RT, Duran M, Vogel DS (2007) Effect of sanitizers, rumensin and temperature on anaerobic digester biomass. Trans ASABE 50:1807–1813CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aix Marseille Univ, Univ Avignon, CNRS, IRD, IMBEMarseilleFrance
  2. 2.Faculté des Sciences St-JérômeAix Marseille UniversitéMarseille Cedex 20France
  3. 3.Depto BiotecnologíaUniversidad Autónoma Metropolitana-IztapalapaMexico CityMexico
  4. 4.LessafreBuenos AiresArgentina
  5. 5.National Research Council CanadaQCCanada

Personalised recommendations